Discriminatory Laws against Persons
Affected by Leprosy
A Compilation of Efforts and
Progress Made to
Repeal/Amend the Laws
Prepared by
Disabled People’s International
In Collaboration with
National Centre for Promotion of Employment
for Disabled People
And
Association of People Affected by Leprosy
Supported by
The Nippon Foundation
30th June 2015
Table of Contents
1.
Introduction ...........................................................................................................................3
2. Chronology of actions taken regarding repeal/ amendment of discriminatory laws against
persons affected by Leprosy ...........................................................................................................6
3.
Interventions made by Government of India : Rajya Sabha and Law Commission.................... 10
4. Recommendations given by various Committees on the discriminatory provisions in various
legislations ................................................................................................................................... 14
5.
Judicial Intervention: Public Interest Litigations /Civil Applications in the Court of Law ........... 29
6.
Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 33
7.
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 36
8.
Annexure 1: Eliminating Discrimination Against Persons Affected by Leprosy (EDPAL) Bill, 2015
37
2
1.
Introduction
Status of people affected by Leprosy in India
India has the highest population of people affected by Leprosy in the world. It is seen
that 58% of new Leprosy cases are from India. From 2005 till 2014, the National
Leprosy Eradication Programme (NLEP) has recorded a rate of 1.25 to 1.35 lakh new
cases every year. The number of Leprosy colonies operating in India is estimated to
be 8501.
There has been little focus on the rights of people affected by Leprosy, the conditions
that they live in and the social stigma they have to face. Several archaic and
discriminatory laws related to marriage, political participation, transport and so on
have remained unchanged and which reinforce the stigma faced by people affected
by Leprosy. NGOs working in the area of Leprosy have been advocating for many years to
change or discard these archaic laws.
The Disability Act, 1995, recognises Leprosy (Leprosy cured) as a disability. Further,
the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), ratified in
2007, provides for all rights on an equal basis with others to all people with disabilities
without any discrimination. Despite these legislations, the ground realities
experienced by persons affected by Leprosy has not changed much. Some efforts
have been undertaken by NCPEDP and other organisations to include persons affected
by Leprosy in the national and state level disability campaigns. However, these efforts
have remained quite piecemeal and have not had continuity. Even today there is lack
of awareness within the disability sector about Leprosy. It is considered a disease
and not a disability by many people in the sector. Even leaders of the Leprosy
movement are not aware of issues concerning people with disabilities in general and
the various laws and the policies that include Leprosy.
In order to bridge this gap, Disabled People’s International (DPI), which is the largest
network of cross disability self-help organisations in the world, with the support of
Nippon Foundation, has taken up a campaign to include the self-help organisations
of people affected by Leprosy in the state, national and international disability
movement. Some of the major activities under the campaign are - (1) including
people affected with Leprosy as members in their respective Member National
Assembly (MNA) in the countries where there is a high incidence of Leprosy; (2)
adding information about Leprosy on the DPI website; (3) organising the first ever
Side Event on Leprosy at the 8th Conference of States Parties, United Nations; (4)
Page 10, Section 2.3.1 and 2.3.2 Report no. 256, Eliminating Discrimination Against
Persons Affected by Leprosy, Law Commission of India, April 2015
1
3
facilitating the inclusion of Leprosy in the Parallel Report of UNCRPD in at least 2
MNAs and (5) initiating a Focused Campaign in India.
The campaign in India started with a two-day ‘National Conference on Leprosy and
Disability’ held for members of the National Disability Network (NDN)2 and the
Association of People Affected by Leprosy (APAL) in January 2015. The aim of the
Conference was to facilitate better understanding of each other’s issues amongst
people with disabilities and people affected by Leprosy from different States. At the
Conference, a unanimous decision was taken to launch a joint campaign for repealing
all the discriminatory laws vis-à-vis persons affected by Leprosy. To further strategise
the campaign, a Core Group was formed, consisting of NDN and APAL members. It
was discussed at the Core Group meeting that several initiatives have been
undertaken in the past for repealing discriminatory laws, like petitions to Rajya
Sabha, petitions to the Prime Minister, Public Interest Litigations, etc. The Group felt
that it would be useful to analyse the steps taken by the various Leprosy
organizations in order to work out a strategy for the campaign. Hence, NCPEDP
undertook the study to compile the efforts and progress made till date vis-à-vis
repealing / amendments to discriminatory laws against persons affected by Leprosy.
The objectives, methodology and the findings of this Study are given in the
subsequent sections.
The Objectives of the Study
1. To compile the various discriminatory laws against persons affected by Leprosy in
India.
2. To document and analyse the actions taken so far by the Leprosy organisations
and the progress made.
3. To make recommendations on how the disability sector can further strengthen the
current efforts of Leprosy organisations towards repealing discriminatory laws.
Methodology
1. Various national level Leprosy organisations/associations were contacted for
information on the work undertaken by them related to discriminatory laws.
2. APAL shared the petitions/ communications/ papers on the subject.
3. Relevant documents were also gathered from the internet.
NDN is a network of Disabled People’s Organisations (DPOs), Self Help Groups and NonGovernment Organisations (NGOs), representing the various States and Union Territories of
the country with each one expanding its network to the District level. The role of NDN
Partners includes information dissemination, capacity building, expanding and strengthening
the network and undertaking advocacy initiatives at all levels.
2
4
All the information gathered was documented and studied in a systematic manner
and a Report prepared for the Core Group to further analyse and strategise the
joint campaign.
5
2.
Chronology of actions taken regarding repeal/
amendment of discriminatory laws against persons
affected by Leprosy
The issue of discriminatory laws against people affected by Leprosy has been quite
often deliberated upon in various conferences, seminars, meetings etc. Resolutions
have been passed in various forums seeking the elimination of all discriminatory laws
and provisions against persons affected by Leprosy. Legislative, judicial and civil
society bodies have called upon the Government to take steps to this effect. Given
below are some of the developments in the area of repealing/amending the
discriminatory laws.
Chronology of Actions Undertaken





1980’s
The Multi Drug Therapy (MDT) was found to cure Leprosy
completely at any stage. The MDT was made freely available by WHO
and it was seen that people could be completely cured of Leprosy. It was
made clear by WHO that no segregation was required and the medicines
were available at Primary Health Centres. This medical development was a
turning point in how Leprosy was perceived. However, the laws made prior
to the development of MDT, which promoted segregation, remained
unchanged.
1990’s
Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) working in the area of Leprosy
started raising the issue with the Government to repeal the
discriminatory laws against persons affected by Leprosy.
March 2004
The High Court of Gujarat in a Public Interest Litigation (Special Civil
Application No.12403/2003), in the matter of ‘SuoMoto v/s Union of India
& Ors’, passed an Order that, “this matter (discriminatory provisions
against the Leprosy affected persons) should attract the attention
of the Central and State Governments”.
October 2004
In view of the High Court Order of Gujarat, the Ministry of Health and
Family Welfare addressed a letter to the Secretaries of all the
Ministries/Departments of the Central Government, Chief Secretaries of all
State Governments and to the Lt. Governors/Administrators of Union
Territories, to identify and delete the discriminatory provisions
against persons affected by Leprosy.
October 2007
6



A Public Interest Litigation, Writ Petition (Civil) No.8112/2007, was filed
before the High Court of Delhi, praying for the issuance of a Writ of
certiorari or any other appropriate writ or directions for identifying
and striking down the discriminatory provisions from various Acts,
Laws, Rules and Government Orders etc. as and where these exist therein.
This writ petition is pending for adjudication before the High Court of Delhi.
The latest Order on 4th August, 2010 stated that, “We have been apprised
by learned counsel for the respondent that the W.P. (C.) No. 83/2010
instituted under Article 32 of the Constitution of India is pending before the
Apex Court and their Lordships have issued notice. In view of the aforesaid,
we think it apposite that this Court should await the decision in the said
writ petition. Accordingly, the present writ petition is adjourned sine
die.”
December 2007
Mr. Ram Naik, along with Dr. P. K. Gopal (President, National Forum of
Leprosy), Dr. Sharad Gokhale (President, International Leprosy Union), Mr.
Uday Thakar (Treasurer, Kushthrog Nivaran Samiti), Shri Shantaram Bhoir
(President, Maharashtra Kushthpidit Sanghatana), and Mr. Bhimrao
Madhale (President, Sanjay Nagar Rahivasi Sangh) submitted a petition
for medico-socio-economic empowerment of persons affected by
Leprosy to Rajya Sabha through Mr. Ved Prakash Goyal, M.P. from
Mumbai.3
June - October 2008
In June 2008, the Chairman, Rajya Sabha forwarded the petition to the
Committee on Petitions, chaired by Mr. M. Venkaiah Naidu, for further
scrutiny. The Committee on Petitions studied the issue and
presented the Report No. 131 in October 2008 to the Rajya Sabha.
One of the recommendations of the Report was to urgently consider
amendments to such anachronistic and discriminatory provisions in
the concerned legislations.
September 2008
One of the points made by Supreme Court in its Judgement4 in the case
of Dhirendra Pandua Vs. State of Orissa & Ors. was, “keeping in view
the present thinking and researches carried on Leprosy as also on
Tuberculosis, and with professional input, the Legislature may seriously
Report on Ram Naik's Petition for Empowerment of Leprosy Affected Persons Submitted to
Rajya Sabha accessed at
http://www.ramnaik.com/pdf/pressrelease/Oct/Oct24/press%20note%20english%20leprocy
.pdf
3
Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 5743 of 2008 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 26226 of 2005)
4
7

consider whether it is still necessary to retain such provisions in
the statutes”.
2010
A Writ Petition was filed in the Supreme Court, ‘Federation of Leprosy
Organisations (FOLO) & ANR. Vs. Union of India & ORS.’ 5 with the following
Prayers:
a) issue appropriate writ or order or direction/order to the Respondents to
identify and report the discriminatory provisions in various Acts,
Laws, Rules, Government Orders etc. as and where these exist; and
b) issue appropriate writ or order or direction/order (s) striking down the
discriminatory provisions in various Acts, Laws, Rules, Government
Orders etc. as and where these exist;
c) pass any other or further order(s)/direction(s) which this Hon’ble Court
deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the matter.
The case is pending. It has been listed seven times earlier. The next
hearing is likely on 7th July 2015.6



September 2010
In September 2010, the Rajya Sabha Committee on Petitions
presented its next Report No. 138, entitled, “Action taken by
Government on Observations/Recommendations contained in its hundred
and thirty first report on petition praying for integration and empowerment
of Leprosy affected persons”.
October 2014
The Law Commission undertook the task of identifying laws which
can either be repealed or which need amendments. Through its four
Reports, viz., Report Nos. 248-251, the Commission recommended repeal
of 288 obsolete laws. In its Report No. 249, ‘Obsolete Laws: Warranting
Immediate Repeal – Second Interim Report’, the Commission
recommended the repeal of The Lepers Act, 1898 in consultation with
the relevant State(s).7
April 2015
Civil 83 of 2010
5
http://courtnic.nic.in/supremecourt/querycheck.asp accessed as on 13th May 2015
6
Page 32, para 57, Report No.249, “Obsolete Laws: Warranting Immediate Repeal” –
Second Interim Report, Law Commission of India, accessed at
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Second%20Interim%20Report%20on%20Obsole
te%20Laws.pdf
7
8
On a request from the Leprosy Mission Trust of India, the Law
Commission took up the study of amending/repealing laws that are
discriminatory towards people affected by Leprosy. After a series of
meetings and deliberations, the Law Commission of India finalized its
Report No.256 titled, “Leprosy Affected Persons and the Laws applicable to
them”. It not only recommended repealing and amending some
discriminatory laws, but also framing a new comprehensive
legislation dealing with all aspects of rights of persons affected by
Leprosy and their family members, “Elimination of Discrimination
against Persons affected by Leprosy Bill, 2015”.
The subsequent sections detail out the developments mentioned above. Section III
provides the broad recommendations of the Rajya Sabha and the Law Commission.
Section IV lists the discriminatory provisions and the recommendations for its
repeal/amendment. Section V provides a brief regarding various cases in the courts
of India vis-a-vis the discriminatory provisions in the laws.
9
3.
Interventions made by Government of India : Rajya
Sabha and Law Commission
The Rajya Sabha and the Law Commission have taken up the matter concerning
issues of persons affected by Leprosy including the discriminatory laws, quite
seriously and have come up with strong recommendations. This section provides, in
brief, the work done by them and their recommendations.
Rajya Sabha Petitions Committee’s Reports (Numbers 131
and 138)
Mr. Ram Naik, along with Dr. P. K. Gopal (President, National Forum of Leprosy,
Tamilnadu), Dr. Sharad Gokhale (President, International Leprosy Union, Pune), Mr.
UdayThakar (Treasurer, Kushthrog NivaranSamiti, Panvel), Mr. Shantaram Bhoir
(President, Maharashtra Kushthpidit Sanghatana), and Mr. Bhimrao Madhale
(President, Sanjay Nagar Rahivasi Sangh, Mumbai) had submitted a petition for
medico-socio-economic empowerment of Leprosy Affected Persons, on 5th December
2007, to Rajya Sabha through Mr. Ved Prakash Goyal, M.P. from Mumbai. After
processing the petition, the Chairman, Rajya Sabha, forwarded it to the Committee
on Petitions, chaired by Mr. M. Venkaiah Naidu, for further scrutiny. All the petitioners
rendered oral evidences before the Committee on 10th June 2008. Subsequently, the
Committee toured and visited several self-settled colonies of Leprosy affected
persons at Mumbai, Hyderabad, Tirupati, Nellore, Chengalpattu, and Chennai. The
Committee also had interactions with NGOs working with Leprosy affected persons,
State Governments, and Municipal Corporations, before presenting its Report No.
131 to Rajya Sabha on 24th October 2008. Some of the important recommendations
made by the Committee are given below:
●
●
●
●
●
●
Sustenance Allowance of Rs. 2000/- per person per month to Leprosy affected
persons.
Free Medical Facilities in their self-settled colonies and free Civic Amenities like
water, electricity, drainage etc.
Free Education to the dependent children of Leprosy affected persons unto
vocational and degree courses etc.
Urgently consider amendments to anachronistic and discriminatory provisions
in the concerned legislations.
Launch a nation-wide campaign advocating the curability of Leprosy and the
humanitarian aspect of Leprosy affected persons.
Use Leprosy Affected Persons as the dignified expression. The labels like leper,
leprosy patient, ex-patient should not be used.
10
●
Since Leprosy affected persons are tossed between the Ministry of Social
Justice & Empowerment and the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, there is
a need for a well-defined policy.8
The Rajya Sabha Committee sought information on the action taken on the
recommendations of the 131st Report from the nodal Ministry i.e. the Ministry of
Health & Family Welfare. The replies were received on 10th December, 2008, which
were a collation of replies from as many as twelve Ministries and Departments of
Government of India and the State Governments of Maharashtra and Orissa.
On 24th March, 2009, the Committee considered the replies furnished by various
Ministries and Departments. On a number of recommendations, the Committee
was
not
satisfied
with
the
action
taken
by
the
concerned
Ministries/Departments including the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare,
and decided to hear the Secretaries of some Ministries/Departments. The
Committee recorded oral evidence from the Secretaries of the following nodal
Ministries i.e. Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Department of Food and Public
Distribution, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Departments of School
Education & Literacy and Higher Education, Ministry of Women & Child Development
and Ministry of Road Transport & Highways, Ministry of Labour and Employment and
Ministry of Finance (Departments of Financial Services and Revenue) and the
Chairman, LIC of India.
The Committee then drafted the Report No. 138, which was adopted in its meeting
held on 15th November, 2010.
Law Commission Reports (Numbers 249 AND 256)
Report 249: ‘Obsolete Laws: Warranting Immediate Repeal’
The Law Commission undertook the task of identifying laws which can either be
repealed or which need amendments. Through its four Reports, viz., Report Numbers
248-251, the Commission recommended the repeal of 288 obsolete laws. In its
Report No.249, ‘Obsolete Laws: Warranting Immediate Repeal – Second Interim
Report’, the Commission recommended the repeal of The Lepers Act, 1898 in
consultation with the relevant State(s). The recommendation is given below.
“Lepers Act, Act 3 of 1898 Category: Public Health Recommendation: Repeal in
consultation with relevant State(s). The Act provided for the segregation and medical
treatment of pauper lepers. The Act established ‘leper asylums’ and conditions for
Report on Ram Naik's Petition for Empowerment of Leprosy Affected Persons Submitted to
Rajya Sabha accessed at
http://www.ramnaik.com/pdf/pressrelease/Oct/Oct24/press%20note%20english%20leprocy
.pdf
8
11
employment of personnel to 33 these asylums. Section 1(3) of this Act mandates
that it shall not come into force in any territory until the concerned State Government
makes a declaration to that effect. The Act has already been repealed in the States
of Gujarat, Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, Punjab,
Karnataka, Orissa, Himachal Pradesh, and Maharashtra, and in the Union Territories
of Delhi, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, Dadra and Nagar Haveli and
Chandigarh. This law, which is completely out of sync with the modern understanding
of the disease and its treatment, must be repealed. The Act is unconstitutional for
being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution because it legalises forcible
segregation of people affected with leprosy. India is a signatory to the United Nations
Resolution on the Elimination of Discrimination against Persons Affected by Leprosy
and their Family Members, 2011 (A/RES/65/215). This legislation goes against the
spirit of this Resolution. Hence, the Central Government should inquire whether it is
in force in any other State, and repeal this law in consultation with any such State.”
9
Report 256: Leprosy Affected Persons and the Laws applicable to
them
On a request from the Leprosy Mission Trust of India, the Law Commission took up
the study of amending / repealing laws discriminatory towards people affected by
Leprosy. After a series of meetings and deliberations, the Law Commission of India
finalized its Report No.256 titled, ‘Leprosy Affected Persons and the Laws applicable
to them’.
Following are the recommendations of the Law Commission:
1. The following Laws and provisions be repealed:
●
●
●
●
●
●
The Lepers Act, 1898 in its entirety;
Sub-section (g) of Section 27 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954;
Sub-section (vi) of Section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939;
Clause (iv) of sub-section (1) of Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955;
Clause (iv) of sub-section (1) of Section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869;
Clause (c) of sub-section (2) of Section 18 of the Hindu Adoption and
Maintenance Act, 1956.
2. The following Laws be modified or amended:
Page 32, para 57, Report No.249, “Obsolete Laws: Warranting Immediate Repeal” –
Second Interim Report, Law Commission of India, accessed at
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Second%20Interim%20Report%20on%20Obsole
te%20Laws.pdf
9
12

The Legal Services Act, 1987:After sub-clause (d) of section 12, the
following sub-clause shall be inserted, namely(dd) a person who suffers from,
or has previously suffered or has been cured of Leprosy; or
 The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: After the first proviso to sub-section (4)
under Section 8 of the Act, the following proviso shall be inserted, namely:
“Provided further that the licensing authority shall not refuse to issue a
learner's license to a person affected by Leprosy, who has been certified by a
registered medical practitioner, as having either been cured of Leprosy, or as
having been administered with the first dose under Multi-Drug Therapy, with
continuing treatment for Leprosy being provided.”
3. Provisions enabling the government to undertake affirmative action in
the following areas be introduced:
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Health
Ownership of property
Social Welfare
Education
Employment
Awareness and training
Participation of Persons affected by Leprosy in the formulation of policies
Setting-up of a Central and State Commission on Leprosy, to monitor the
compliance of the provisions of the Act in respect of public and private
establishments and to make recommendations to the Central or State
Government, as applicable, for the proper implementation of this Act.
Although amendments can be made in each and every law specified above, the
Commission recommends that a single statute should deal with all aspects of
rights of persons affected by Leprosy and their family members. This will
ensure coherence and send out a strong signal of the resolve of the Government of
India to tackle discrimination faced by persons affected by Leprosy. This statute
should be titled as the “Elimination of Discrimination against persons affected
by Leprosy Bill, 2015(EDPAL)”. This stand-alone law, apart from comprehensively
covering the repeal/modification of the specified statutes, shall contain principles of
non-discrimination and equal protection before law. These principles shall specify that
(1) No person, or public or private establishment shall discriminate against any
person affected by Leprosy, or members of his family on any ground in relation to
their affliction of Leprosy, or their disability, physical attributes or any other form of
their association with Leprosy; and (2) All persons affected by Leprosy and members
of their family shall be entitled to the recognition, enjoyment and exercise, on an
equal basis, of all human rights including freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution
of India. Further, the law shall also contain enabling provisions regarding affirmative
action and repeal and amend discriminatory provisions listed above. The Law
Commission Report has included a Model Bill which is given in Annexure 1. The Law
13
Commission has strongly recommended that the “Bill should be converted into a law
as expeditiously as possible by the Government of India.”
4.
Recommendations given by various Committees on
the discriminatory provisions in various legislations
The table below lists the discriminatory provisions of the legislations and the
recommendations of the Rajya Sabha Committee and the Law Commission. It also
includes the relevant proposed provisions in the Model Law, EDPAL Bill 2015, as
suggested by Law Commission.
S.
No.
1.
Name of the Legislation,
Section No. and Discriminatory
Provision/s
Recommendations of Various
Committees
The Indian Lepers Act, 1898
Rajya Sabha Committee Report:
The entire Act is discriminatory. It
was framed for the “segregation and
medical
treatment
of
pauper
lepers.” The Act has been repealed
in 17 States and UTs of India10.
The Report did not cover The Indian Lepers
Act, 1898.
The Law Commission Report:
The Lepers Act, 1898 should be repealed in
its entirety.11
The Model Law, EDPAL Bill, 201512 has the
following provision:
“4. The statutes and provisions enumerated
in Schedule I are hereby repealed.” The
Schedule 1 - Repealed Provisions and Acts,
has listed The Lepers Act, 1898.
The States and UTs that have repealed the Lepers Act 1898 are Gujarat, Assam,
Nagaland, Meghalaya, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, Punjab, Karnataka, Orissa,
Himachal Pradesh, Maharashtra, Delhi, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, Dadra
and Nagar Haveli and Chandigarh. Page 33, Report No. 249, “Obsolete Laws: Warranting
Immediate Repeal, Second Interin Report,, Law Commission of India, October 2014
10
Section C, Summary, Page 47, Section 7.11(i), Report no. 256, Eliminating Discrimination
Against Persons Affected by Leprosy, Law Commission of India, April 2015
11
Section 4, Repeal of Certain Enactments and Schedule 1 of the Model Bill, Eliminating
Discrimination Against Persons Affected by Leprosy
12
14
S.
No.
2.
Name of the Legislation,
Section No. and Discriminatory
Provision/s
Recommendations of Various
Committees
The Special Marriage Act, 1954,
27(1)(g)13
Rajya Sabha Committee Report:
The discriminatory provisions contained in
27(1) “petition for divorce may be the following personal laws which stand as
presented to the district court either barrier to the empowerment of persons
by the husband or the wife on the affected by Leprosy:
ground that the respondent—(g)
has been suffering from Leprosy, (i) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955;
the disease not having been
(ii) Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939;
contracted from the petitioner”.
Dissolution of Muslim Marriages (iii) Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872;
Act, 1939, 2 (vi)14
(iv) Indian Divorce Act, 1869; and
2. Grounds for decree for dissolution
of marriage.—A woman married (v) Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act,
1956
under Muslim law shall be entitled to
obtain a decree for the dissolution of
her marriage on any one or more of The Committee had also given a time frame
of six months to remove discriminatory
the following grounds, namely:—"
provisions therein against persons affected
(vi) That the husband ............is by Leprosy.”18
suffering from Leprosy ...
Law Commission Report:
The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955,
The following Laws and provisions be
13 (1) (iv)15
repealed:
13. Divorce- (1) Any marriage
solemnized, whether before or after ● Sub-section (g) of Section 27 of the
Special Marriage Act, 1954;
the commencement of the Act, may,
on a petition presented by either the ● Sub-section (vi) of Section 2 of the
Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939;
husband or the wife, be dissolved by
a decree of divorce on the ground ● Clause (iv) of sub-section (1) of Section
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/4234/
13
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1458498/
14
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/590166/
15
Section 4.13.3, Rajya Sabha Committee on Petitions, 138th Report on Action Taken by
Government on Observations/ Recommendations Contained in its 131st Report on Petition
Praying for Integration and Empowerment of Leprosy Affected Persons, Rajya Sabha
Secretariat, November 2010.
18
15
S.
No.
Name of the Legislation,
Section No. and Discriminatory
Provision/s
that the other party- (iv) has been
suffering from a virulent and
incurable form of leprosy;.
The
Hindu
Maintenance
(2)(c) 16
Adoption
and
Act, 1956, 18
18 Maintenance of wife. —(2) A
Hindu wife shall be entitled to live
separately
from
her
husband
without forfeiting her claim to
maintenance— (c) if he is suffering
from a virulent form of leprosy
The Divorce
(1)(iv) 17
Act,
1869,
Recommendations of Various
Committees
13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955;
Clause (iv) of sub-section (1) of Section
10 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869;
● Clause (c) of sub-section (2) of Section
18
of
the
Hindu
Adoption
and
Maintenance Act, 1956.19
The Model Law, EDPAL Bill, 201520 has the
following provision: “4. The statutes and
provisions enumerated in Schedule I are
hereby repealed.” The Schedule 1 - Repealed
Provisions and Acts, has listed the above
mentioned laws.
●
10
10 Grounds for dissolution of
marriage. — (1) Any marriage
solemnized, whether before or after
the commencement* of the Indian
Divorce (Amendment) Act, 2001,
may, on a petition presented to the
District Court either by the husband
or the wife, be dissolved on the
ground that since the solemnization
of the marriage, the respondent—
(iv) has, for a period of not less than
two years immediately preceding
the presentation of the petition,
been suffering from a virulent and
incurable form of leprosy
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/946025/
16
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/806295/
17
Page 48, Section 7.11, Report no. 256, Eliminating Discrimination Against Persons
Affected by Leprosy, Law Commission of India, April 2015
19
Section 4, Repeal of Certain Enactments and Schedule 1 of the Model Bill, Eliminating
Discrimination Against Persons Affected by Leprosy
20
16
S.
No.
3.
Name of the Legislation,
Section No. and Discriminatory
Provision/s
Recommendations of Various
Committees
The Persons with Disabilities
(Equal Opportunities, Protection
of Rights and Full Participation)
Act, 199521
Rajya Sabha Committee Report:
Section 2 (i) of the Act says:
Disability" means1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
blindness;
low vision;
leprosy-cured;
hearing impairment;
locomotor disability;
mental retardation;
mental illness;
n. "leprosy cured person" means
any person who has been cured of
leprosy but is suffering froma) loss of sensation in hands or
feet as well as loss of sensation
and paresis in the eye and eyelid but with no manifest
deformity;
b) manifest deformity and paresis
but having sufficient mobility in
their hands and feet to enable
them to engage in normal
economic activity;
c) Extreme physical deformity as
well as advanced age which
prevents him from undertaking
any gainful occupation, and the
expression "leprosy cured"
shall be construed accordingly;
The Secretary, Ministry of Social Justice &
Empowerment during his deposition on 16th
November, 2009 mentioned that,
“Substitution of the words "leprosy cured" by
the words "leprosy affected persons" in
Section 2(i) (iii) of PWD Act, 1995 may not
be possible as there was no illustrative
definition for the "leprosy affected persons".
He illustrated that if a person had been
infected with leprosy in the last fifteen days
or one month and his treatment was going
on, then according to the definition proposed
by the Committee, he would also be treated
as "disabled person", which would defeat the
intended purpose of providing relief to the
actually disabled ones. The Secretary
mentioned that disability should be long term
physical, mental, intellectual or sensory
impairment. According to him, the PWD Act
was not an instrument for overcoming
disabilities and that social disability was
something which belonged to a different
domain and there were laws like Protection
of Civil Rights Act, 1955 etc., which dealt
with
curbing
untouchability
or
discrimination.”
The Rajya Sabha Committee “noted the view
of the Ministry of Social Justice &
Empowerment to the extent that the Persons
with
Disabilities
(Equal
Opportunity,
Protection of Rights & Full Participation) Act,
1995 does not recognize disease but only
disability.”
Law Commission Report:
“The term Leprosy-cured does not appear to
include Persons affected by Leprosy who are
undetected or undergoing treatment and yet
exhibit all or any of the three conditions
21
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/376202/
17
S.
No.
Name of the Legislation,
Section No. and Discriminatory
Provision/s
Recommendations of Various
Committees
described in the schedule. This term should
therefore be amended to have a wider scope
that covers larger number of persons who are
affected by Leprosy, such as undetected
Persons affected by Leprosy or Persons
affected by Leprosy undergoing treatment.”
22
4.
The Persons with Disabilities
(Equal Opportunities,
Protection of Rights and Full
Participation) Act, 1995:
Rajya Sabha Committee Report:
Section 2(t):"person with disability"
means a person suffering from not
less than forty per cent of any
disability as certified by a medical
authority;
5.
The Rehabilitation
Council
of
Give disability certificate to leprosy affected
persons having less than 40% of disabilities
with the sole purpose of making their
economic and social integration into the
society effective.23
Law Commission Report:
“40% and above disability criteria under the
Persons with Disabilities Act fails to cover
persons cured of Leprosy with only Grade I
disability, since the loss of sensation
constitutes only 6-9% disability as per
calculation process. On account of these
observations,
the
Law
Commission
recommends that the term Leprosy cured
needs to either be removed or broadened to
cover all categories of Persons affected by
Leprosy.”24
Same as above, as for the Persons with
Disabilities Act, 1995.
Page 37, 7.4, Report no. 256, Eliminating Discrimination Against Persons Affected by
Leprosy, Law Commission of India, April 2015
22
Section 4.2.5, Rajya Sabha Committee on Petitions, 138th Report on Action Taken by
Government on Observations/ Recommendations Contained in its 131st Report on Petition
Praying for Integration and Empowerment of Leprosy Affected Persons, Rajya Sabha
Secretariat, November 2010.
23
Page 37-38, Section 7.5, Report no. 256, Eliminating Discrimination Against Persons
Affected by Leprosy, Law Commission of India, April 2015
24
18
S.
No.
Name of the Legislation,
Section No. and Discriminatory
Provision/s
Recommendations of Various
Committees
India Act, 199225
Section 2(1)(c) of the Rehabilitation
Council of India Act, 1992 uses the
same definition of disability with all
its sub-categories, as mentioned
under Section 2(i) the Persons with
Disabilities Act, 1995.
6.
ü
Rights of People with
Disabilities Bill, 201426
The Schedule:
9:“leprosy cured person” means a
person who has been cured of
leprosy but is suffering from— (i)
loss of sensation in hands or feet as
well as loss of sensation and paresis
in the eye and eye-lid but with no
manifest deformity; (ii) manifest
deformity and paresis but having
sufficient mobility in their hands and
feet to enable them to engage in
normal economic activity; (iii)
extreme physical deformity as well
as advanced age which prevents
him or her from undertaking any
gainful
occupation,
and
the
expression “leprosy cured” shall be
construed accordingly.
Rajya Sabha Committee Report:
It does not cover the RPD Bill, 2014
Law Commission Report:
Same recommendations as given for Persons
with Disabilities Act 1995.
2 (p) “person with benchmark
disability” means a person with not
less than forty per cent of a specified
disability where specified disability
has not been defined in measurable
terms and includes a person with
disability where specified disability
has been defined in measurable
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/223852/
25
http://www.prsindia.org/uploads/media/Person%20with%20Disabilities/The%20Right%20
of%20Persons%20with%20Disabilities%20Bill.pdf
26
19
S.
No.
Name of the Legislation,
Section No. and Discriminatory
Provision/s
Recommendations of Various
Committees
terms, as certified by the certifying
authority;
7.
Juvenile
Justice
Care
and
Protection Act, 200027 48 (2)
and 58
48 (2) Where a juvenile or the child
is found to be suffering from
leprosy, .................. he shall be
dealt with separately through
various specialised referral services
or under the relevant laws as such.
8.
Rajya Sabha Committee Report:
According to the submission made by the
Secretary of the Ministry of Women and Child
Development to the Rajya Sabha Committee
on 18th January 2010, “Any child affected
with Leprosy should not be segregated or be
removed to a separate place. The words
'leprosy' and 'leper asylum' should be deleted
from Sections 48 and 58 of the Act.”
58. Transfer of juvenile or child
......suffering from leprosy .....
where it appears to the competent
authority that any juvenile or the
child kept in a special home or a
children's home or shelter home or
in an institution in pursuance of this
Act, is suffering from leprosy..........
the competent authority may order
his removal to a leper asylum
...............
Rajya Sabha Committee has recommended
that, “till the Act is amended, an advisory
may be issued to the State Governments not
to segregate children suffering from leprosy
and other diseases in the Juvenile Home.” 28
Motor Vehicles Act, 198829
Rajya Sabha Committee Report:
(4) If, from the application or from
the medical certificate referred to in
sub-section (3), it appears that the
applicant is suffering from any
disease or disability which is likely to
The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways
responded that no change in law is required
since leprosy is not specified in the Act.
“Written advisories have been sent to all
State Govt./UTs on 22nd January, 2010 to
Law Commission Report:
It has not covered/studied the Act.
http://wcd.nic.in/childprot/jjact2000.pdf
27
Sections 4.92 and 4.93, Rajya Sabha Committee on Petitions, 138th Report on Action
Taken by Government on Observations/ Recommendations Contained in its 131st Report on
Petition Praying for Integration and Empowerment of Leprosy Affected Persons, Rajya Sabha
Secretariat, November 2010.
28
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/785258/
29
20
S.
No.
Name of the Legislation,
Section No. and Discriminatory
Provision/s
Recommendations of Various
Committees
cause the driving by him of a motor
vehicle of the class which he would
be authorised by the learner’s
license applied for to drive to be a
source of danger to the public or to
the passengers,
the
licensing
authority shall refuse to issue the
learner’s license: Provided that a
learner’s license limited to driving
an invalid carriage may be issued to
the applicant, if the licensing
authority is satisfied that he is fit to
drive such a carriage.
issue instructions to all RTOs/Licensing
authorities not to discriminate persons
affected by Leprosy while issuing learner's
license or regular driving license.” The Rajya
Sabha Committee noted with satisfaction the
action taken by the Ministry.30
Law Commission Report:
Amendment to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988:
“After the first proviso to sub-section (4)
under Section 8 of the Act, the following
proviso shall be inserted, namely:
Provided further that the licensing authority
shall not refuse to issue a learner's licence to
a person affected by Leprosy, who has been
certified by a registered medical practitioner,
as having either been cured of Leprosy, or as
having been administered with the first dose
under Multi-Drug Therapy, with continuing
treatment for Leprosy being provided.”
The Model Law, EDPAL Bill 2015, Section 5,
“The statutes and provisions enumerated in
column I of Schedule II shall stand amended
in accordance with respective entries in
column II of Schedule II.” The Schedule II,
Amendments to Certain Enactments, lists the
above mentioned amendments to the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988.31
9.
The Railways Act, 198932
Rajya Sabha Committee Report:
Section 4.11.1, 4.11.3 and 4.11.4, Rajya Sabha Committee on Petitions, 138th Report on
Action Taken by Government on Observations/ Recommendations Contained in its 131st
Report on Petition Praying for Integration and Empowerment of Leprosy Affected Persons,
Rajya Sabha Secretariat, November 2010.
30
Page 55 and 65, Annexure – EDPAL Bill 2015, Report no. 256, Eliminating Discrimination
Against Persons Affected by Leprosy, Law Commission of India, April 2015,
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Report256.pdf
31
http://www.indianrailways.gov.in/railwayboard/uploads/codesmanual/Railway_Act.PDF
32
21
S.
No.
Name of the Legislation,
Section No. and Discriminatory
Provision/s
Recommendations of Various
Committees
56. (1) A Person suffering from such
infectious or contagious diseases, as
may be prescribed, shall not enter
or remain in any carriage on a
railway or travel in a train without
the permission of a railway servant
authorised in this behalf.
Ministry of Railways in their written
submission to Rajya Sabha stated that,
(2) The railway servant giving
permission under sub-section (1),
shall arrange for the separation of
the person suffering from such
disease from other persons in the
train and such person shall be
carried in the train subject to such
other conditions as may be
prescribed.
(3) Any person who enters or
remains in any carriage or travels in
a train without permission as
required under sub-section (1) or in
contravention of any condition
prescribed under sub-section (2), such
person
and
a
person
accompanying him shall be liable to
the forfeiture of their passes or
tickets and removal from railway by
any railway servant.
“...in 1989, it was decided to remove the
"Leprosy"
from
the
list
of
contagious/infectious diseases. In other
words, there were no restrictions on Leprosy
affected persons to travel in trains along with
regular passengers since 1989. Since
Leprosy is not included in the list of
infectious/contagious diseases, provisions of
Section 56 of Indian Railways Act, 1989, are
not applicable in this case.” The Committee
has noted the explanations offered by
Ministry of Railways.33
Law Commission Report:
It states, “to tackle this issue of movement,
the proposed legislation should provide
measures that endeavour to ensure that the
Persons affected by Leprosy are guaranteed
the right of travel in public transport ......”.
The legislation should also ensure nondiscrimination of Persons affected by Leprosy
in public transports such as railways”.34
The Model Law, EDPAL Bill, 2015 has the
following provision:
13. Right to Movement: No person affected
by Leprosy, or any member of his family,
shall be denied the right to movement in
respect of all or any public transport or for
obtaining a driving license for all or any
Section 4.10.2 and 4.10.3 Rajya Sabha Committee on Petitions, 138th Report on Action
Taken by Government on Observations/ Recommendations Contained in its 131st Report on
Petition Praying for Integration and Empowerment of Leprosy Affected Persons, Rajya Sabha
Secretariat, November 2010.
33
Page 44, Section 7.10.13, Report no. 256, Eliminating Discrimination Against Persons
Affected by Leprosy, Law Commission of India, April 2015,
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Report256.pdf
34
22
S.
No.
Name of the Legislation,
Section No. and Discriminatory
Provision/s
Recommendations of Various
Committees
vehicle, on account of being affected with
leprosy. 35
10.
Bombay Municipal Corporation
Act, 188836
421. Information to be given of
existence of dangerous disease or
continuous pyrexia of unknown
origin. Every medical practitioner
who treats or becomes congnizant
of the existence of any dangerous
disease or any case of continuous
pyrexia of unknown origin of more
than four days’ duration [These
words were inserted by Bom. 20 of
1952, s. 17(1).] in any private or
public, dwelling, other than a public
hospital, shall give information of
the same with the least practicable
delay to the executive health officer.
The said information shall be
communicated in such form and
with such details as the executive
health officer, with the consent of
the Commissioner, may from time
to time require.
Rajya Sabha Committee Report:
“The State Government of Maharashtra
should endeavor to implement its own
suggestion and expedite the process of
amendment to their extant laws, i.e., a new
sentence viz. "The section is not applicable to
patients of leprosy whether cured or not",
should be inserted at the end of Section 421
of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act,
1888.”37
The Law Commission Report:
“Relevant provisions under the ... State Acts
such as the Bombay Municipal Corporation
Act, 1888, permit the denial of certain rights,
privileges and concessions to persons who
suffer from an infectious or contagious
disease or disability. Leprosy, in light of its
traditional understanding, continues to be
included within the range of such contagious
diseases and disabilities”. However, the
report does not give any recommendation for
amendment to the Act.38
Page 58, Section, 13, Annexure – EDPAL Bill 2015, Report no. 256, Eliminating
Discrimination Against Persons Affected by Leprosy, Law Commission of India, April 2015,
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Report256.pdf
35
http://vakindia.org/pdf/BMC-Act-1888.pdf
36
Section 4.14.4, Rajya Sabha Committee on Petitions, 138th Report on Action Taken by
Government on Observations/ Recommendations Contained in its 131st Report on Petition
Praying for Integration and Empowerment of Leprosy Affected Persons, Rajya Sabha
Secretariat, November 2010.
37
Page 21, Section 4.4, Report no. 256, Eliminating Discrimination Against Persons Affected
by Leprosy, Law Commission of India, April 2015,
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Report256.pdf
38
23
S.
No.
11.
Name of the Legislation,
Section No. and Discriminatory
Provision/s
Recommendations of Various
Committees
The Industrial Disputes Act,
194739 Section 2(o)(oo)(c)
Rajya Sabha Committee Report:
(c) termination of the service of a
workman
on
the
ground
of
continued ill- health
“The Secretary, Labour & Employment has
informed the Committee that the definition of
the term "continued ill-health" in Section
2(oo) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
has the scope of subjective element. He has
submitted that the Ministry is examining the
issues of clarifying/defining the term
'continued ill-health' under rules. The Rajya
Sabha Committee has noted the reply.”40
Law Commission Report:
“This section does not mention Leprosy as a
ground for termination as such, but may be
indirectly
resorted
to
terminate
the
employment of an affected person or his/her
family member due to the social stigma
attached to the condition”.
The Law Commission recommended that, “to
tackle these issues of employment, the
proposed legislation should include measures
that prohibit termination of employment of
Persons affected by Leprosy and their family
members solely on the basis of the infection
of the disease and the associated stigma. ” 41
Model Bill, EDPAL Bill 2015, has the
following provisions:
15. Right to Employment: No person
affected by Leprosy, or any member of his
family, shall be denied the right to be
39
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/500379/
Sections 4.12.3 and 4.12.4, Rajya Sabha Committee on Petitions, 138th Report on Action
Taken by Government on Observations/ Recommendations Contained in its 131st Report on
Petition Praying for Integration and Empowerment of Leprosy Affected Persons, Rajya Sabha
Secretariat, November 2010.
40
Page 42-43, 7.10.8, Report no. 256, Eliminating Discrimination Against Persons Affected
by Leprosy, Law Commission of India, April 2015,
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Report256.pdf
41
24
S.
No.
Name of the Legislation,
Section No. and Discriminatory
Provision/s
Recommendations of Various
Committees
nominated, selected or elected, or to
continue his appointment, as the case may
be, to a public office or for private
employment, after he has duly furnished a
certificate
by
a
registered
Medical
Practitioner that attests that such person has
been administered with the first dose under
Multi-Drug Therapy and continues to undergo
or has completed treatment for Leprosy. 42
12.
State Municipal and Panchayati Raj
Acts – including the Orissa
Municipal Act, 1950, Andhra
Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965,
Orissa Gram Panchayats Act, 1964,
Andhra Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act,
1994, Chhattisgarh and Madhya
Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1993,
the Rajasthan Panchayati Act, 1994
and the Rajasthan Municipality Act,
1959 and several other analogous
legislations
The provisions on eligibility in the
various State Municipality and
Panchayat Raj legislations listed,
state that Persons affected by
Leprosy are liable to be disqualified
from holding a civic post on the
ground of their infection of
Leprosy.43
For example, in Orissa Municipal
Act, 1950, Section 16, states,
Rajya Sabha Committee Report:
The Report has covered only the Orissa
Municipal and Panchayati Raj Acts. It
mentions that, “The State Government of
Orissa in their counter affidavit filed in reply
to Writ Petition No. 83 of 2010 (Public
Interest Litigation filed by Federation of
Leprosy
Organisations
(FOLO)
and
International Leprosy Union Vs Union of
India) in the Supreme Court of India have
submitted
that
the
Acts/Rules/Byelaws/Executive
Instruction,
which
are
prevalent in the State of Orissa, shall be
amended if actually discrimination is found
there. To that effect, necessary steps have
been initiated by the concerned Departments
to bring in amendments to the following Acts
so as to bring appropriate Bills before the
Orissa Legislative Assembly:(i)
The Orissa Municipal Corporation Act,
1950;
(ii)
The Municipal Corporation Act, 2003;
(iii)
The Orissa Panchayat Act, 1959; and
Section 15, Page 58, Annexure – EDPAL Bill 2015, Report no. 256, Eliminating
Discrimination Against Persons Affected by Leprosy, Law Commission of India, April 2015,
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Report256.pdf
42
Section 7.6, Page 38, Report no. 256, Eliminating Discrimination Against Persons Affected
by Leprosy, Law Commission of India, April 2015,
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Report256.pdf
43
25
S.
No.
Name of the Legislation,
Section No. and Discriminatory
Provision/s
Recommendations of Various
Committees
“Disqualification of Candidates for
election
(iv)
(iv)
............a
leprosy
tuberculosis patient”;44
or
a
The validity of these provisions has
been upheld by the Supreme Court
in its judgment in the case of
Dhirendra Pandua.45
The Orissa Gram Panchayat Act,
1964” The Committee has noted the
explanations offered by Government
of Orissa.46
Law Commission Report:
The Law Commission observed that there is
a strong basis to do away with the
restrictions on eligibility of Persons affected
by Leprosy to stand for civic posts. 47
However, no specific recommendations have
been given in the report for amending the
Acts.
Model Bill, EDPAL Bill 2015, mentions in
Section 6, “Laws that are not enumerated in
Schedule I or Schedule II, whether Central or
State,
which
directly,
or
indirectly
discriminate against persons affected by
Leprosy shall be invalid insofar as such laws
discriminate against persons affected by
Leprosy.”
13.
Beggary Laws - including Andhra
Pradesh Prevention of Begging Act,
1977,
Bombay
Prevention
of
Begging
Act,
1959,
Gujarat
Rajya Sabha Committee Report:
The Report has covered only the Bombay
Prevention of Begging Act 1959. It is
mentioned that, “it hopes that the State
Government of Maharashtra would endeavor
http://www.legalcrystal.com/act/136305/orissa-municipal-act-1950-complete-act
44
Page 38, Section 7.6, Report no. 256, Eliminating Discrimination Against Persons Affected
by Leprosy, Law Commission of India, April 2015,
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Report256.pdf
45
Section 4.15.2 and 4.15.3, Rajya Sabha Committee on Petitions, 138th Report on Action
Taken by Government on Observations/ Recommendations Contained in its 131st Report on
Petition Praying for Integration and Empowerment of Leprosy Affected Persons, Rajya Sabha
Secretariat, November 2010.
46
Page 38, Section 7.6, Report no. 256, Eliminating Discrimination Against Persons Affected
by Leprosy, Law Commission of India, April 2015,
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Report256.pdf
47
26
S.
No.
Name of the Legislation,
Section No. and Discriminatory
Provision/s
Recommendations of Various
Committees
Prevention of Begging Act, 1959 and
several other analogous legislations
to implement its own suggestion and
expedite the process of amendment to their
extant laws with a view to integrate and
empower the persons affected by Leprosy of
its State.”50
According to the Law Commission
Report, “Under all the State-level
beggary prevention laws, the term
leper has been used to refer to
Persons affected by Leprosy. These
laws also allow for beggars and their
dependents who suffer from Leprosy
to be detained or confined to
Leprosy asylums indefinitely.”48
Example: The Bombay Prevention of
Begging
Act,
1959:
“Medical
Examination and detention of
leprosy patients and lunatics.- 26
(1) “where it appears to the Chief
Commissioner that any beggar
detained in a Certified Institution
under any order of a court is of
unsound mind or a leper, the Chief
Commissioner may by an order
setting forth the grounds of belief
that the beggar is of unsound mind
or a leper, order his removal to a
mental hospital or leper asylum or
other place of safe custody, there to
be kept and treated as the Chief
Commissioner
directed
during
remainder of the term for which he
has been ordered to be detained or,
if on the expiration of that term it is
Law Commission Report:
“.....persons affected by Leprosy should not
be detained or confined to Leprosy asylums
indefinitely only on account of their infection
of the disease ......”
“Additionally, the use of the term leper is
derogatory and contributes to the stigma
associated with the disease. Therefore, the
Law Commission recommends that such a
term should be removed from the statute
book and all government records”.51
Model Bill, EDPAL Bill 2015, mentions in
Section 6, “Laws that are not enumerated in
Schedule I or Schedule II, whether Central or
State,
which
directly,
or
indirectly
discriminate against persons affected by
Leprosy shall be invalid insofar as such laws
discriminate against persons affected by
Leprosy.”
It gives an illustration: “A, a person affected
by Leprosy who is found begging, is arrested
and detained under the provisions of a State
Prevention of Begging Act, solely on account
Page 36, Section 7.3, Report no. 256, Eliminating Discrimination Against Persons Affected
by Leprosy, Law Commission of India, April 2015,
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Report256.pdf
48
Section 4.14.9, Rajya Sabha Committee on Petitions, 138th Report on Action Taken by
Government on Observations/ Recommendations Contained in its 131st Report on Petition
Praying for Integration and Empowerment of Leprosy Affected Persons, Rajya Sabha
Secretariat, November 2010.
50
Page 36, Section 7.3, Report no. 256, Eliminating Discrimination Against Persons Affected
by Leprosy, Law Commission of India, April 2015,
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Report256.pdf
51
27
S.
No.
14.
Name of the Legislation,
Section No. and Discriminatory
Provision/s
Recommendations of Various
Committees
certified by a medical officer that it
is necessary for the safety of the
beggar or of others that he should
be further detained under medical
care or treatment, then until he is
discharged according to law.”49
of his affliction with Leprosy. With the coming
into force of this section, any such provision
for the arrest and detention of persons
affected by Leprosy under the State
Prevention of Begging Act shall be invalid.
The detention and arrest of A will be invalid.”
The Life Insurance Corporation
Act, 1956
Rajya Sabha Committee Report:
The Rajya Sabha Committee Report did not
cover this Act.
Law Commission Report:
It is mentioned in the Report that, the Life
Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 contains a
discriminatory provision, wherein higher
premium rates are to be charged from
Persons affected by Leprosy on account of
the higher risk to their lives as understood
through past notions.52
The Model Bill, EDPAL Bill 2015, has
provision for equality and non-discrimination
(Chapter II, Section 3). Moreover, Section 20
for ‘Measures Related to Social Welfare’
includes access to health insurance or other
social insurance.
Section 26 (1), The Bombay Prevention of Begging Act, 1959
http://delhi.gov.in/wps/wcm/connect/f2214e0043383b63b2d1f3cf71a315bd/THE+BOMBAY
+PREVENTION+OF.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&lmod=716342930&CACHEID=f2214e0043383b63b2d1f3cf71a315bd
49
Page 19, Section 4.3, Report no. 256, Eliminating Discrimination Against Persons Affected
by Leprosy, Law Commission of India, April 2015,
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Report256.pdf
52
28
5.
Judicial Intervention: Public Interest Litigations /Civil
Applications in the Court of Law
S.
No.
Name of the Court Status of the Case
and Case number
1.
High Court of Gujarat Date of Order: 16th March, 2004
at
Ahmadabad
Special
Civil Oral Order:(Per: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Application No.
After hearing Shri S. N. Shelat, Advocate General
12403 of 2003Suo for Gujarat, Shri A. K. Phookan, Advocate General
Moto Versus Union of for Assam, and Ms. Dharmishta Raval, Senior
Standing Counsel for Central Government, we are of
India53
the opinion that the matter should receive attention
of the State Governments and Central Government
instead the Court adjudicating it at this stage.
Accordingly, with these observations, the Special
Civil Application stands disposed of.
Follow up of the order:
Consequently, on 14th October, 2004 the
Government of India issued a letter to the
Secretaries of all the Ministries/ Departments of the
Government of India, Chief Secretaries of all the
State Governments, Lt. Governors/ Administrators
of all the Union Territories, “to review and amend
the laws containing discriminatory provisions
against the Leprosy afflicted Persons”
2.
High Court of Delhi
W.P.(C) 8112/2007
Kusth Asha Deep
Federation Thr. its
Secretary Diwa
Vs.
Judgment Pending as on 13th May 2015
Prayer: For issuance of a writ of certiorari or any
other appropriate writ or directions for identifying
and striking down the discriminatory provisions
from various Acts, Laws, Rules, and Government
UOI & ORS.54
http://gujarathc-casestatus.nic.in/gujarathc/tabhome.jsp
53
http://delhihighcourt.nic.in/dhc_case_status_list_new.asp
54
29
S.
No.
Name of the Court Status of the Case
and Case number
Orders etc. as and where these exist therein.
55
Latest Order: 4th August, 2010
“We have been apprised by learned counsel for the
respondent that the W.P. (C.) No. 83/2010
instituted under Article 32 of the Constitution of
India is pending before the Apex Court and their
Lordships have issued notice. In view of the
aforesaid, we think it apposite that this Court should
await the decision in the said writ petition.
Accordingly, the present writ petition is adjourned
sine die. 56
3.
High Court of Orissa
The petitioner called in question the order/
judgment dated 16th November 2004 of the election
Writ Petition under
tribunal cum discrict judge, Balasore, passed in
Art.226 &
Election misc. Case No. 7 of 2003. The writ
227.(WP(C)) 12860 petitioner Dhirendra Pandua contested and was
of 2004 Dhirendra
elected as Councillor and also as the Chairman of
Pandua Vs. Election
NAC in 2003. The Opposite Party, Surendra Chandra
Tribunal
Mohanti filed the election petition under Section 38
of the Orissa Municipal Act, 1950, alleging
disqualification of the writ petitioner under Sections
16 (i)(iv) and 17(1)(b). The opposite party pleaded
that the writ petitioner is still suffering from Leprosy
and therefore is disqualified to continue as the
Councillor as well as the Chairman of NAC. The writ
petitioner contested the case denying the allegation
and claimed himself to have been cured on the date
of the elections.
Date of Disposal57: 7th October, 2005.
The High Court upheld the order of the Election
55
file:///C:/Users/Rama%20C/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/Content.Outlook/
OT0SLCV8/Supreme%20Court%20Brahm%20Dutt%20PETITION.htm
http://delhihighcourt.nic.in/dhcqrydisp_o.asp?pn=132349&yr=2010
56
http://courtnic.nic.in/orissa/main2000.asp
57
30
S.
No.
Name of the Court Status of the Case
and Case number
Tribunal which had upheld the provisions of the
Orissa Municipal Act which disqualifies a person with
Leprosy from holding such posts.
4.
Supreme Court Civil Judgment delivered on September 19, 2008
Appeal No. 5743 of
2008 (Arising out of Judgement: The appeal was dismissed. Some of the
S.L.P. (C) No. 26226 points made in the Judgment are mentioned below.
58
of 2005)
DhirendraPandua Appellant Vs. State
of Orissa & ORS. Respondents
“19. It is perceptible that on appellant’s own
showing that he was having some doubts about at
least the reactivation of the disease and had to
approach this Court for appropriate directions to
the concerned authorities for providing adequate
facilities for periodical check ups including
bacteriological tests and issue of fitness certificate.
Thus, the District Judge as also the High Court was
justified in coming to the conclusion that on facts
obtaining at the relevant time, the appellant had not
been fully cured of leprosy.”
“21. Having regard to these circumstances, we are
convinced that the said classification does bear a
reasonable and just relation with the object sought
to be achieved by the statute in question and cannot
be said to be unreasonable or arbitrary. Accordingly,
we hold that Sections 16(1)(iv) and 17(1)(b) of the
Act are not violative of Article 14 of the
Constitution.”
“22. Keeping in view the present thinking and
researches carried on leprosy as also on
tuberculosis, and with professional input, the
Legislature may seriously consider whether it is still
necessary to retain such provisions in the statutes.”
“23. The appeal, being devoid
of any merit,
is dismissed accordingly, but without any costs.”
Full Judgment can be accessed at link
http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=32528
58
31
S.
No.
Name of the Court Status of the Case
and Case number
5.
Supreme Court:
Writ Petition (Civil)
83
of
2010.
Federation
of
Leprosy
Organisations
(FOLO) and & ANR.
Vs. Union of India &
ORS.
Prayer:
a) issue
appropriate
writ
or
order
or
direction/order to the Respondents to identify
and report the discriminatory provisions in
various Acts, Laws, Rules, Government
Orders etc. as and where these exist; and
b) issue
appropriate
writ
or
order
or
direction/order (s) striking down the
discriminatory provisions in various Acts,
Laws, Rules, Government Orders etc. as and
where these exist;
a. pass
any
other
or
further
order(s)/direction(s)
which
this
Honourable Court deems fit and proper in
the facts and circumstances of the
matter.59
The case of pending. Listed seven times
earlier. Next hearing likely on 7th July 2015. 60
59
file:///C:/Users/Rama%20C/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/Content.Outlook/
OT0SLCV8/Supreme%20Court%20Brahm%20Dutt%20PETITION.htm
http://courtnic.nic.in/supremecourt/querycheck.asp accessed as on 13th May 2015
60
32
6.
Analysis
The Law Commission, the Rajya Sabha Committee on Petitions as well as the
Supreme Court of India are unanimous in their opinion that the discriminatory
provisions in various laws against persons affected by Leprosy should be
repealed/amended as these are based on an archaic understanding that Leprosy was
an ‘incurable and virulent’ disease.
Civil society organisations have been seeking a repeal/ amendment of these laws for
almost three decades through PILs, letters, petitions, meetings, etc. A significant
outcome of these efforts include the Reports (131 and 138) of the Rajya Sabha
Committee on Petitions, the Reports (249 and 256) of the Law Commission of India
and the various court orders. The recommendation of all the Reports is to do
away/modify these antiquated provisions in the various laws.
The Law Commission in the 256th Report has recommended that although
amendments can be made in each and every law that is discriminatory, it would be
more effective to frame a single statute to deal with all aspects of rights of Persons
affected by Leprosy and their family members. This will ensure coherence and send
out a strong signal of the resolve of the Government of India to tackle discrimination
faced by Persons affected by Leprosy. This statute should be titled as the “Elimination
of Discrimination against Persons affected by Leprosy Bill, 2015”.
The Law
Commission has also included a Model Bill in the annexure of the Report. According
to the Report, “This stand-alone law, apart from comprehensively covering the
repeal/modification of the specified statutes, shall contain principles of nondiscrimination and equal protection before law. Further, the law shall also contain
enabling provisions regarding affirmative action.”
Following are some of the merits of having a comprehensive Law for Elimination of
Discrimination against Persons affected by Leprosy:
1. The Bill covers persons affected by Leprosy and their family members:
● “Persons affected by Leprosy means and includes a person who suffers from,
or has previously suffered or has been cured of Leprosy, whether or not such
a person has undergone treatment under the Multi-Drug Therapy;
● Members of their family, with reference to persons affected by Leprosy, means
—
(i) spouse of the person affected by Leprosy;
(ii) parents of the person affected by Leprosy;
(iii) children of the person affected by Leprosy; and
33
(iv) brothers or sisters of the person affected by Leprosy.”
2. The Bill includes specific provisions for repeal and amendments to certain
enactments. The provisions are:
●
●
Repeal of the Lepers Act 1898 in its entirety.
Repeal of discriminatory provisions in five personal acts related to marriage,
divorce, etc.
● Amendments to the Legal Services Act and the Motor Vehicles Act.
It further states clearly that the provisions of this Act shall have effect
notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any enactment or
instrument having the force of law.
3. It also addresses the specific problems of people living in Leprosy
colonies with respect to their ownership of the land.
●
“The appropriate government shall make efforts to provide security of tenure,
title and ownership of property for all persons affected by Leprosy and
members of their family living in leprosy colonies.
● No person affected by Leprosy or members of his family shall be removed or
evicted from the existing leprosy colonies without prior sanction of the Central
or the State Commission of Leprosy, as the case may be, and without being
rehabilitated and adequately compensated.”
4. The Bill has provisions to ensure non-discrimination of persons affected
by Leprosy by any person or any public or private establishment:
“No person, establishment or government, shall discriminate against any person
affected by Leprosy, or members of his family on any ground in relation to their
affliction with Leprosy, or their disability, physical attributes or any other form of
their association with Leprosy”
5. The Bill provides clarity with respect to the term that should be used to
refer persons affected by Leprosy:
“Notwithstanding any other law for the time being in force, in all laws that are in
force, and in all official records of the Government of India, State Governments,
and establishments defined under sub-section (2) of Section 2, the term ‘leper’
and other such terms in national, regional and local languages, shall be
substituted by the term ‘persons affected by Leprosy’ or any other term in the
national, regional or local language that is synonymous.”
6. The Bill has provisions for the government to undertake affirmative
action in the following areas:
●
Health
34
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Ownership of property
Social Welfare
Education
Employment
Awareness and training
Participation of Persons affected by Leprosy in the formulation of policies
Setting-up of a Central and State Commission on Leprosy, to monitor the
compliance of the provisions of the Act in respect of public and private
establishments and to make recommendations to the Central or State
Government, as applicable, for the proper implementation of this Act.
The Bill is not in contradiction with but would complement the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities Bill. For example, The Disability Bill provides for reservation in education,
employment, and several other rights and measures that would benefit people
affected by Leprosy, which are not part of the Leprosy Bill.
According to the Disability Bill, only persons having 40% or above of any disability
are considered as persons with disability. This condition may exclude several persons
affected by Leprosy. This issue should be seriously looked into when the guidelines
are being drafted so that the loss of sensations and other barriers are taken into
account while ascertaining the percentage of disability in persons affected by Leprosy.
In addition, the term ‘Leprosy cured’ in the Schedule of the Disability Bill should be
replaced by the term ‘persons affected by Leprosy’.
35
7.
Conclusion
The sustained effort of persons affected by Leprosy and the various NGOs for almost
three decades to repeal/amend the discriminatory laws, has reached a point where
there seems a clear cut way forward, i.e. to enact a comprehensive Bill “Elimination
of Discrimination against Persons affected by Leprosy Bill, 2015”.
The task ahead for the Leprosy organisations is to take a closer look at the Leprosy
Model Bill to ensure all the relevant issues are covered and to make any changes if
required to the Bill. The larger disability sector should provide its support to the
leprosy organisations in campaigning for the speedy passage of the Bill.
36
8.
Annexure 1: Eliminating Discrimination Against
Persons Affected by Leprosy (EDPAL) Bill, 2015
A Bill to enact a comprehensive protection regime for persons affected by Leprosy
and members of their family; to eliminate any discrimination or denial of equal
treatment; to repeal and amend existing laws that negatively affect such persons and
promote their segregation and discrimination; and to enable the State to discharge
its positive obligations through affirmative action
REAFFIRMING that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights,
and that everyone is entitled to the enjoyment of human rights without distinction of
any kind, such as caste, sex, language, religion, disability or deformity, national or
social origin, birth or other status;
REAFFIRMING that persons affected by Leprosy and members of their family are
entitled to be treated as individuals with dignity and bearers of human rights,
including equality before the law and the equal protection of the law, without any
discrimination;
RECALLING India’s obligations as a signatory to the United Nations Resolution on the
Elimination of Discrimination against persons affected by Leprosy and their Family
Members, 2011, the United Nations Principles and Guidelines for the Elimination of
Discrimination against persons affected by Leprosy and their Family Members, 2010,
and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2006;
ENABLING the government to give due consideration to the principles and guidelines
mentioned herein, while repealing certain obsolete and archaic laws and formulating
policies and guidelines for the equal and non-discriminatory treatment of persons
affected by Leprosy;
Now therefore be it enacted in the Sixty-fifth year of the Republic of India:-
37
CHAPTER I: PRELIMINARY
SHORT TITLE AND COMMENCEMENT
1.
(1) This Act may be called the Elimination of Discrimination against Persons
affected by Leprosy Act, 2015.
(2) It extends to the whole of India.
(3) It shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by
notification in the Official Gazette, appoint.
DEFINITIONS
2. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,—
(1) “appropriate government” means,—
(i)
in relation to the Central Government or any establishment wholly or
substantially financed by that Government, or any body constituted by
a law made by Parliament or a Cantonment Board constituted under the
Cantonments Act, 2006, the Central Government; or
(ii)
in relation to the State Government or any other establishment under
sub-section (2) of this section that is not covered under clause (i) of this
sub-section, the State Government;
(2) “establishment”– means and includes a company, club, firm or any other body
corporate or association of persons jointly carrying out a systematic activity
for consideration or otherwise including but not limited to;
(i)
a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, or a cooperative society under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912
(ii)
a trust under the Indian Trusts Act, 1882 or corresponding state law
under which trusts may be established;
(iii)
any organisation or institution or authority established by or under a
Central Act or State Act or otherwise;
(iv)
any industry under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947; or
(v)
any shop or establishment governed by a State Act concerning such
shops and establishments;
(3) “disability due to Leprosy” – means grade 1 or grade 2 disability in the hand,
leg or eye that hinders full and effective participation of a person affected by
Leprosy in society equally with others, whether or not his extent of disability
has been specified in measurable terms;
Explanation:
(i)
Grade 1 disability includes sensory impairment, scars with sensory
impairment or muscle weakness without contractures.
(ii)
Grade 2 disability includes visible impairment, Lagophthalmos,
Iridocyclitis, visual acuity of <6/60, burns, deep cracks, wounds (both
simple and deep ulcers), muscle atrophy, bone absorption of shortening
or contractures.
(4) “Leprosy” – means a disease triggered by Mycobacterium Lepraecharacterised
by symptoms of pale and reddish skin, numbness of hands or feet or loss of
feeling in a patch of skin, and which may lead to disability as defined under
sub-section (3) of this section;
38
(5) “leprosy cured person” – includes, notwithstanding anything in the Persons
with Disability Act, 1995 or any other law pertaining to persons with disability,
any person affected by Leprosy, regardless of the percentage of his disability,
who has been certified by a registered medical practitioner, as having been
administered with the first dose under Multi-Drug Therapy, which renders his
illness non-contagious, and such person continues with or has completed
treatment for Leprosy.
(6) “person affected by Leprosy” – means and includes a person who suffers from,
or has previously suffered or has been cured of Leprosy, whether or not such
person has undergone treatment under Multi-Drug Therapy;
(7) “Multi-Drug Therapy” (MDT) – means the medical treatment wherein a
combination of drugs are administered to a person affected by Leprosy in order
to render the infection non- contagious through the first dose and kill
Mycobacterium Leprae;
(8) “members of their family”, with reference to persons affected by Leprosy,
means —
(i)
spouse of the person affected by Leprosy;
(ii)
parents of the person affected by Leprosy;
(iii)
children of the person affected by leprosy; and
(iv)
brothers or sisters of the person affected by Leprosy.
39
CHAPTER II: EQUALITY AND NON-DISCRIMINATION
EQUALITY AND NON- DISCRIMINATION
3.
(1) No person, establishment or government, shall discriminate against any
person affected by Leprosy, or members of his family on any ground in relation
to their affliction with Leprosy, or their disability, physical attributes or any
other form of their association with Leprosy;
(2) All persons affected by Leprosy and members of their family shall be entitled
to the recognition, enjoyment and exercise, on an equal basis, of all human
rights including freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of India.
REPEAL OF CERTAIN ENACTMENTS
4. The statutes and provisions enumerated in Schedule I are hereby repealed.
AMENDMENTS TO CERTAIN ENACTMENTS
5. The statutes and provisions enumerated in column I of Schedule II shall stand
amended in accordance with respective entries in column II of Schedule II.
CERTAIN LAWS TO BE INVALID
6. Laws that are not enumerated in Schedule I or Schedule II, whether Central or
State, which directly, or indirectly discriminate against persons affected by
Leprosy shall be invalid insofar as such laws discriminate against persons affected
by Leprosy.
Illustration
A, a person affected by Leprosy who is found begging, is arrested and detained under
the provisions of a State Prevention of Begging Act, solely on account of his affliction
with Leprosy. With the coming into force of this section, any such provision for the
arrest and detention of persons affected by Leprosy under the State Prevention of
Begging Act shall be invalid. The detention and arrest of A will be invalid.
SUBSTITUTION OF CERTAIN TERMS
7. Notwithstanding any other law for the time being in force, in all laws that are in
force, and in all official records of the Government of India, State Governments,
and establishments defined under sub-section (2) of Section 2, the term ‘leper’
and other such terms in national, regional and local languages, shall be
substituted by the term ‘persons affected by Leprosy’ or any other term in the
national, regional or local language that is synonymous.
40
CHAPTER III: RIGHTS OF PERSONS AFFECTED BY LEPROSY
DUTY TO UPHOLD RIGHTS
8.
(1) No government, establishment or person, shall deny persons affected by
Leprosy and members of their family, any rights guaranteed to them under
this Chapter.
(2) All legislative, administrative and other measures necessary to ensure
compliance of the provisions of this Chapter shall be undertaken by the
appropriate government.
RIGHT TO HEALTH AND TREATMENT
9.
(1) No person affected by Leprosy shall be denied the right to treatment for
Leprosy under Multi-Drug Therapy.
(2) All persons affected by Leprosy shall have the right to access other healthcare
facilities including but not limited to reconstruction surgeries and medicines.
DISCLOSURE OF MEDICAL RECORDS
10.The medical records relating to Leprosy of persons affected by Leprosy and
members of their family shall be treated as confidential and shall not be disclosed
to any person or establishment unless:
(1) the prior informed consent of the affected person to such disclosure has been
obtained; or
(2) such disclosure, without such consent, is authorised by law.
RIGHT TO OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTY
11.No person affected by Leprosy, or members of his family, shall be denied the right
to own property or to reside, purchase, rent, use or otherwise occupy, any
property, merely for reason of such person being affected by leprosy.
RIGHT TO ACCESS PUBLIC GOODS AND SERVICES
12.No person affected by Leprosy, or any member of his family, shall be denied the
right to access, or enjoy or use any goods, accommodation, service, facility,
benefit, privilege or opportunity dedicated for the use of the general public or
customarily available to the public, whether or not for a specific fee, including
shops, public restaurants, hotels and places of public entertainment or the use of
wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads, burial grounds or funeral ceremonies and
places of public resort.
RIGHT TO MOVEMENT
13.No person affected by Leprosy, or any member of his family, shall be denied the
right to movement in respect of all or any public transport or for obtaining a
driving license for all or any vehicle, on account of being affected with leprosy.
41
RIGHT TO EDUCATION
14.No person affected by Leprosy, or any member of his family, shall be denied the
right to education and training opportunities in any institution, including the right
to continue or resume his education or training in any institution, after duly
furnishing a certificate by a registered Medical Practitioner that attests that such
affected person has been administered with the first dose under Multi-Drug
Therapy and continues to undergo or has completed treatment for Leprosy or any
such similar treatment as approved by the Government of India or World Health
Organisation.
RIGHT TO EMPLOYMENT
15.No person affected by Leprosy, or any member of his family, shall be denied the
right to be nominated, selected or elected, or to continue his appointment, as the
case may be, to a public office or for private employment, after he has duly
furnished a certificate by a registered Medical Practitioner that attests that such
person has been administered with the first dose under Multi-Drug Therapy and
continues to undergo or has completed treatment for Leprosy.
RIGHT TO FORM FAMILY
16.No person affected by Leprosy, or any member of his family, shall be denied the
right to marry, and form a family including through access to adoption or assisted
procreation (including donor insemination).
42
CHAPTER IV: MEASURES FOR AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
DUTY TO UNDERTAKE MEASURES
17.Without prejudice to the generality of the obligations mentioned under Section 8
and in addition to them, the appropriate government shall undertake all measures
specified in this Chapter.
HEALTH- RELATED MEASURES
18.The appropriate government shall undertake the following measures relating to
healthcare, for all persons affected by Leprosy and members of their family, that
shall include but not be limited to:
(1) implementation of awareness programmes for all persons affected by Leprosy
that emphasise the importance of an early treatment through Multi-Drug
Therapy, to reduce chances of any kind of disability as a result of Leprosy;
(2) formulation of guidelines and protocols for addressing the healthcare needs of
all persons affected by Leprosy;
(3) access to healthcare facilities that include reconstruction surgeries, and goods
and services for all persons affected by Leprosy, to improve the health status
of, and respond to the needs of all persons affected by Leprosy;
(4) humane treatment of all persons affected by Leprosy by health care providers;
(5) adoption of policies, and programmes for education and training of healthcare
professionals, to enable them to deliver the highest attainable standard of
healthcare to all persons affected by Leprosy and members of their family;
(6) protection of all persons affected by Leprosy and members of their family
against unethical or involuntary medical procedures or research, including in
relation to vaccines, treatments or microbicides for terminal or such other
diseases; and
(7) providing medical and psychological treatment and counselling for all persons
affected by Leprosy and members of their family, to assist them in overcoming
their trauma suffered on account of their disability, physical attributes or any
other form of their association with Leprosy.
MEASURES RELATED TO OWNERSHIP AND TITLE
19.
(1) The appropriate government shall make efforts to provide security of tenure,
title and ownership of property for all persons affected by Leprosy and
members of their family living in leprosy colonies.
(2) No person affected by Leprosy or members of his family shall be removed or
evicted from the existing leprosy colonies without prior sanction of Central or
State Commission of Leprosy, as the case may be, and without being
rehabilitated and adequately compensated.
MEASURES RELATED TO SOCIAL WELFARE
20.The appropriate government shall undertake the following measures relating to
social welfare, for all persons affected by Leprosy, and members of their family,
that shall include but not be limited to:
43
(1) formulation of special financial packages that are designed for providing means
of livelihood and adequate housing for persons affected by Leprosy and their
family members, during and after the treatment;
(2) formation and establishment of a Community- based Rehabilitation forum;
(3) promotion of schemes for neighbourhood support and security;
(4) access to social security and other social protection measures, including
employment benefits, parental leave, unemployment benefits, health
insurance or other social insurance, family benefits, funeral benefits, pensions
and benefits with regard to the loss of support for spouses or partners as the
result of illness or death on account of Leprosy, and poverty reduction
strategies and programmes; and
(5) enforcement of social programmes, including support programmes, to address
factors relating to discrimination of the affected persons, that increase their
vulnerability to isolation, homelessness and mental trauma.
MEASURES RELATED TO EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT
21.The appropriate government shall undertake the following measures relating to
education and employment for persons affected by Leprosy, who have either been
cured of Leprosy, or who have been duly certified, by a registered Medical
Practitioner, as having been administered with the first dose under Multi-Drug
Therapy and is continuing treatment for Leprosy, and members of the family of
any person affected by Leprosy, that shall include but not be limited to:
(1) implementation of educational programmes that impart education and training
that is directed at the development of personalities, talents, and mental and
physical abilities of persons, to their fullest potential, and responds to their
needs; and
(2) access to employment and advancement opportunities, in all areas of public
service, including all levels of government service and employment in public
institutions.
OTHER MEASURES
22.The appropriate government shall undertake the following other measures in the
interest of all persons affected by Leprosy and members of their family, that shall
include but not be limited to:
(1) enforcement of social awareness programmes to dispel misconceptions
surrounding Leprosy and disseminate information in respect of its treatment
through Multi-Drug Therapy;
(2) enforcement of special programmes for addressing discrimination, prejudice
and other social factors that undermine the health of persons affected by
Leprosy because of their disability, physical attributes; and
(3) implementation of training and awareness- raising programmes in all
establishments and institutions, including but not limited to schools and
hospitals, to raise awareness regarding the needs of those affected by or
associated with the disease.
44
PARTICIPATION IN THE FORMULATION OF POLICIES
23.Persons affected by Leprosy shall be entitled to participate in the formulation of
policies affecting their welfare.
ADMINISTRATION
24.
(1) The Central Government shall within 12 months of the coming into force of this
Act, by notification, constitute a Central Commission on Leprosy, to monitor
the compliance of the provisions under Chapter III and Chapter IV of this Act
in respect of all establishments for which the Central Government is the
appropriate Government, and to make recommendations to the Central
Government, for the proper implementation of this Act.
(2) State Governments shall, within 12 months of the coming into force of this Act,
by notification, constitute a State Commission on Leprosy, to monitor the
compliance of the provisions under Chapter III and Chapter IV of this Act in all
establishments for which the State Government is the appropriate
Government, and to make recommendations to the State Government, for the
proper implementation of this Act within 12 months of the coming into force
of this Act.
45
CHAPTER V: ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES
NON-COMPLIANCE OF PROVISIONS, RULES OR MEASURES UNDER
THE ACT
25.Notwithstanding any other law for the time being in force, any person affected by
Leprosy or member of his family or a person acting bona fide on their behalf,
aggrieved with the violation or non- compliance of the provisions of Part III of this
Act or any rules made thereunder, may institute a petition against the concerned
persons or establishments in the District Court in whose jurisdiction the said
person ordinarily resides or where the violation or non-compliance is alleged to
have taken place and the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, shall
apply to such proceedings.
LEGAL AID
26.
(1) Where persons aggrieved under Section 25 of this Act, are unable to, or do not
have the sufficient means to, engage a legal practitioner to represent them in
any proceeding under this Act, the appropriate Legal Services Authority under
the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 shall provide legal aid to such persons.
(2) Persons affected by Leprosy and members of their family filing a petition under
Section 25 of this Act shall be deemed to be persons entitled to legal services
under Section 12 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.
LIABILITY FOR NON-COMPLIANCE
27.In any petition under Section 25, where the Court finds that any person or
establishment has breached or not complied with the provisions of this Act, it shall
award to the person affected by Leprosy or a member of his family, compensation,
and damages of not less than twenty five thousand rupees along with all costs
incurred in litigation.
46
CHAPTER VI: MISCELLANEOUS
POWER TO ISSUE DIRECTIONS
28.The appropriate government may, in exercise of its powers and performance of
its functions under this Act, issue such directions, as it may deem fit, for the
purposes of this Act, to any person or establishment and such person or
establishment shall be bound to comply with such directions.
POWER TO CALL FOR INFORMATION
29.The appropriate government may call for such information from any person or
establishment as it may deem necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act.
POWER TO MAKE RULES
30.
(1) The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make
rules for carrying out the purposes of this Act;
(2) Every rule made under sub-section (1) shall be laid, as soon as may be after
it is made, before each House of Parliament, while it is in session, for a total
period of thirty days which may be comprised in one session or in two or more
successive sessions, and if, before the expiry of the session immediately
following the session or the successive session aforesaid, both Houses agree
in making any modification in the rule or both Houses agree that the rule
should not be made, the rule shall thereafter have effect only in such modified
form or be of no effect, as the case may be; so, however, that any such
modification or annulment shall be without prejudice to the validity of anything
previously done under that rule.
POWER TO REMOVE DIFFICULTIES
31.If any difficulty arises in giving effect to the provisions of this Act, the Central
government may, by order published in the Official Gazette, make such
provisions, not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, as appear to it to be
necessary or expedient for removing the difficulty:
Provided that no order shall be made under this section after the expiry of the
period of two years from the date of commencement of this Act.
APPLICATION OF CERTAIN LAWS
32.The provisions of this Act shall be in addition to, and not in derogation of the
Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 or any laws pertaining to persons with
disability.
ACT TO HAVE OVERRIDING EFFECT
33.The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent
therewith contained in any enactment or instrument having the force of law.
47
SCHEDULE I – REPEALED PROVISIONS AND ACTS
1) Repeal of the Lepers Act, 1898 in its entirety;
2) Repeal of explanation (g) of Section 27 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954;
3) Repeal of sub-section (vi) of Section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage
1939;
4) Repeal of clause (iv) of sub-section (1) of Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage
1955;
5) Repeal of clause (iv) of sub-section (1) of Section 10 of the Indian Divorce
1869;
6) Repeal of clause (c) of sub-section (2) of Section 18 of the Hindu Adoption
Maintenance Act, 1956.
Act,
Act,
Act,
and
SCHEDULE II – AMENDMENTS
Legislation (I)
Amendment (II)
1) Legal Services Act, 1987
After sub-clause (d) of section 12, the following subclause shall be inserted, namely:
(dd) a person who suffers from, or has previously
suffered or has been cured of Leprosy; or
2) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
After the first proviso to sub-section (4) under Section
8 of the Act, the following proviso shall be inserted,
namely:
Provided further that the licensing authority shall not
refuse to issue a learner's licence to a person affected
by Leprosy, who has been certified by a registered
medical practitioner, as having either been cured of
Leprosy, or as having been administered with the first
dose under Multi-Drug Therapy, with continuing
treatment for Leprosy being provided.
48